Philippine ports slip in 2021 container port performance ranking

• Philippine ports slip in 2021 Container Port Performance Index (CPPI)

• The 2021 CPPI ranked Cebu, Subic, Cagayan de Oro, Davao, and Manila ports lower on both administrative and statistical metrics

• CPPI considers Manila as a large port (handling more than 4 million twenty-foot equivalent units per year)

• Cebu is a medium port (handling 0.5 million to 4 million TEUs per year)

• Small ports (less than 0.5 million TEUs per year) include Subic, Cagayan De Oro, and Davao

Philippine ports slipped in the 2021 Container Port Performance Index (CPPI).

The ports of Cebu, Subic, Cagayan De Oro, Davao, and Manila ranked lower in the second edition of the CPPI, developed by the World Bank and S&P Global Market Intelligence.

The ranking is based on the time vessels needed to spend in port to complete workloads over the course of 2021, a year that saw unprecedented port congestion and disruption to global supply chains due to COVID-19.

The index, which graded 370 ports worldwide in 2021, used two approaches: administrative, which is an aggregate of the performance of the port, weighted relative to the average, across call and vessel size; and statistical, which used factor analysis.

Under the administrative approach:

• Cebu placed 164^thin 2021 from 151^st in 2020
• Subic was at 181^st
• Cagayan de Oro at 208^th from 122^nd
• Davao at 274^th from 143^rd
• Manila at 327^th from 322^nd

Under the statistical approach:

• Cebu ranked 171^stin 2021 from 140^th
• Subic at 178^th
• Cagayan de Oro at 226^thfrom 128^th
• Davao at 279^th from 156^th
• Manila at 324^th from 276^th

Subic port was not included in the 2020 CPPI. Batangas port, which was part of the 2020 CPPI, was not included in the 2021 index.

CPPI by throughput

By throughput, Manila was included in the 49 ports considered as large or those that handle more than 4 million twenty-foot equivalent units (TEU) per year.

Cebu joined 148 ports considered as medium or those which handle 0.5 million to 4 million TEUs per year.

Listed under the 173 small ports (less than 0.5 million TEUs per year) were Subic, Cagayan De Oro, and Davao.

East Asia ports

Among 66 ports in East Asia included in the index, China’s Yangshan, Ningbo, and Guangzhou were part of the top 10 overall ranking, placing 4^th, 7^th, and 9^th. Other East Asian ports in the top 30 were:

2. Ningbo (7^{th overall})
3. Guangzhou (9^th)
4. Yokohama (10^th)
5. CaiMep (13^th)
6. Shekou (16^th)
7. Chiwan (17^th)
8. TanjungPelepas (18^th)
9. Kaoshiung (21^st)
10. Busan (25^th)
11. Tianjin (27^th)

The index highlighted the resilience of East Asian ports and the capacity of Chinese ports in particular to effectively handle challenges brought about by the pandemic, according to a statement by S&P Global.

Overall, King Abdullah Port in Saudi Arabia and Port of Salalah in Oman ranked first and second, respectively, in the 2021 index in both administrative and statistical approaches.

READ: Middle East ports most efficient globally

Key port performance metrics show large discrepancies in global port efficiency in 2021, with top performers such as King Abdullah Port achieving an average of 97 container moves per hour of vessel port time compared with just 26 container moves per hour at the main ports on North America’s West Coast.

The CPPI is based on total port hours per ship call, defined as the elapsed time between the docking of a ship and its departure from the berth, having completed its cargo exchange.

The CPPI is intended to serve as a key reference point for stakeholders in the global economy, including national governments, port authorities and operators, development agencies, supranational organizations, various maritime interests, and other public and private stakeholders in trade, logistics, and supply chain services.

The intention was to identify gaps and opportunities for improvement in a comparable manner that will benefit all stakeholders, from shipping lines to national governments to consumers. – Roumina Pablo